Disaster Strikes: Regulatory Barriers to the Effective Delivery of International Disaster Assistance within the EU

2011 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Williams ◽  
Justine N. Stefanelli
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
Natural Disasters ◽  
Quality Standards ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
The European Union ◽  
International Assistance ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Disaster Assistance ◽  
Legal Frameworks ◽  
The Eu

AbstractThis article considers the European Union's legal framework and its ability to facilitate – or hinder – international assistance for natural disasters occurring within the European Union. At a time when the frequency and severity of natural disasters in the EU appears to be increasing, and when it is more likely that affected EU Member States are required to seek assistance from outside their borders, or even outside the EU, it is important to ensure that international assistance is able to reach its intended target. Member State domestic legal frameworks may delay, obstruct or prevent international assistance from reaching those in need, often due to a failure to consider the special situation of disasters when drafting, interpreting and applying legislative regimes. For example, immigration, customs, food and transport laws may not contain sufficient exemptions for emergency personnel, materials and goods, and domestic licensing requirements and quality standards may prevent a nation from accepting assistance. At the same time, there is a need to ensure that any assistance accepted by an affected Member State is subject to appropriate quality standards without unduly impeding the delivery of assistance.

scholarly journals Technology Transfer in the EU: Exporting Strategically Important ICT Solutions to Other EU Member States

2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 5-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anni Säär ◽  
Addi Rull
Keyword(s):  
Technology Transfer ◽  
Member State ◽  
Information Exchange ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
Past Experiences ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The fast development of ICTs pose new challenges to the European Union and its Member States. Every EU country has its own policies regarding technology transfer, ownership of state e-services, and the possibilities how the state-owned or licensed e-service could be exported. Taking into account the free movement of goods, the EU has created a platform to cooperate and export IT solutions. However, the lack of preparedness of infrastructures, legislation and stakeholders for cross-border exchanges poses a threat to IT transfer and should be taken into consideration in the EU as well. In the coming decades the number of outsourced ICT solutions, strategically important ICT solutions, public services and critically important information exchange platforms developed on behalf of the states, will grow exponentially. Still, digital development is uneven across the EU, they grow at different speeds and the performance is quite splintered. There are legal provisions which are outdated and therefore impede technological cooperation and export of IT solutions. A Member State may restrict the ICT licensing based on national security and policy reasons and the ownership of intellectual property might pose a threat to technology transfer or further development of the IT solution. There are examples of strategically important export of ICT solutions, the experience at which can be expanded to cover other EU Member States. Strong collaboration would enable mutual learning from past experiences along with the opportunities for better use of technology. Parallels can be drawn with military technology transfers, as the policies and legal framework was first developed and mostly used with them.This introduces a question of what are the conditions for exporting strategically important ICT solutions from one Member State to another, given that there is no common legal framework developed yet, and who should decide whether to transfer or not?

Front-of-pack nutrition labelling in the European Union: a behavioural, legal and political analysis

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-24
Author(s):  
Vincent DELHOMME
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Dietary Habits ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Present Contribution ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Nutrition Labelling ◽  
Political Analysis ◽  
Legislative Proposal ◽  
The Eu

Amidst a growing interest from European Union (EU) Member States, the European Commission recently announced that it would put forward a legislative proposal for the adoption of a harmonised and mandatory front-of-pack nutrition labelling scheme at the EU level. The present contribution discusses the implications of such an adoption, taking a behavioural, legal and policy angle. It introduces first the concept of front-of-pack nutrition labelling and the existing evidence regarding its effects on consumer behaviour and dietary habits. It then presents the legal framework currently applicable to (front-of-pack) nutrition labelling in the EU and discusses some of the main political and practical aspects involved with the development of a common EU front-of-pack label.

Caught Between National and Supranational Values: Limitations to Judicial Cooperation in Criminal Matters as Part of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice within the European Union

2008 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-72
Author(s):  
Olivia den Hollander
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Judicial Cooperation ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Third ◽  
The One ◽  
Criminal Matters ◽  
The Eu

AbstractCurrently, the European Union is based on both supranational (first pillar) and international (second and third pillar) law. The third pillar signifies police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters and although formally based on international law, it has been under increasing "supranational pressure" by the developments in the "Area of Freedom, Security and Justice". This Area is focused on a set of common values and principles closely tied to those of the single market and its four "freedoms". The main argument of this article is that the legal framework of the third pillar is an impediment to judicial cooperation in criminal matters in general, and to the coordination of conflicts of jurisdiction and the principle of ne bis in idem in particular. The legal framework of the third pillar finds itself in the middle of an identity crisis, since it can neither be identified as a traditional intergovernmental, nor as a supranational institutional framework. Criminal law is a politically sensitive matter, which on the one hand explains why the EU member states are reluctant to submit their powers over the issue to the European level and on the other hand, it implies that if the EU member states really want to cooperate on such an intensive level, they will have to submit some of their powers in order to strengthen EU constitutional law. The article suggests a reform of the third pillar through the method of "communitization", which is exactly what will happen in case the EU Reform Treaty will enter into force. This would offer the ingredients for a true international community in which the ambitious agenda of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice can realise its aim of a common set of values and principles which supersedes those of each of the member states individually.

Responding through transposition: public Euroskepticism and European policy implementation

2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher J. Williams
Keyword(s):  
Policy Implementation ◽  
Member State ◽  
Public Attitudes ◽  
State Governments ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Policy ◽  
Member States ◽  
European Directives ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Eu

Do public attitudes concerning the European Union affect the speed with which member states transpose European directives? It is posited in this article that member state governments do respond to public attitudes regarding the EU when transposing European directives. Specifically, it is hypothesized that member state governments slow transposition of directives when aggregate public Euroskepticism is greater. This expectation is tested using extended Cox proportional hazard modeling and data derived from the EU’s legislative archives, the official journals of EU member states, and the Eurobarometer survey series. It is found that member state governments do slow transposition in response to higher aggregate public Euroskepticism. These findings have important implications for the study of European policy implementation, as well as for our understanding of political responsiveness in the EU.

scholarly journals Environmental Inspections and the EU: Securing an Effective Role for a Supranational Union Legal Framework

2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Hedemann-Robinson
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Member State ◽  
Environmental Protection ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Policy Field ◽  
The Future ◽  
Effective Role ◽  
Legislative Measures ◽  
The Eu

AbstractOver several years, the European Union (EU) has gradually developed its legal framework to assist in the proper application of EU environmental protection rules, both at Member State as well as at EU institutional levels. This article focuses on one particular and relatively recent emerging element of that supranational framework, namely the range of EU secondary legislative measures and provisions concerning the management of environmental inspections. In addition to appraising the extent of EU legislative engagement in relation to environmental inspections, this article reflects on certain challenges of a constitutional nature that the EU will need to address in the future if its intervention in this particular policy field is to continue to develop.

scholarly journals The Implication of Fiscal Principles and Rules on Promoting Sustainable Public Finances in the EU Countries

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (7) ◽  
pp. 2772 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mihaela Onofrei ◽  
Anca Gavriluţă (Vatamanu) ◽  
Ionel Bostan ◽  
Florin Oprea ◽  
Gigel Paraschiv ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Panel Data Analysis ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Fiscal Rules ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Fiscal Responsibility ◽  
Public Finances ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
The Status ◽  
Outstanding Debt ◽  
The Eu

The purpose of this study was to analyze fiscal behavior in the European Union countries, to highlight the implications of institutional constraints on healthy fiscal attitudes, and to test the relationship between government decisions, fiscal responsibility instruments, and the sustainability of public finances during the period 2000–2014. By using panel data analysis, we tested the responsiveness of primary balance to government indebtedness, as well as to some determinants of fiscal responsibility, such as the degree of public spending or fiscal rules effectiveness, and we included two different perspectives regarding fiscal rules status. First, we computed a fiscal responsibility index, which measures the applicability of or compliance with the fiscal rules, referring to legal dimensions and administrative and institutional capacity. Second, we established a fiscal responsibility convergence index, which measures the status of the EU Member States regarding the approach of numerical rules. The empirical findings indicate that fiscal authorities do not act to the existing stock of public debt and highlights a negative response of budget balances to the stock of outstanding debt. Fiscal position improves when the index of fiscal responsibility is involved and countries become more sustainable when they are related to the entire level of fiscal governance, with respect to legal framework, institutional and administrative capacity, but at the debt ratio threshold of over 90%, the effect of the overall fiscal rule comes out as less relevant for the improvement of the primary balance.

Re-Addressing the Harmonisation of European Takeover Law post-Brexit

2021 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 305-340
Author(s):  
Lars Ruf
Keyword(s):  
Role Model ◽  
Regulatory Reform ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Significant Finding ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Current State ◽  
The Us ◽  
State Of Research ◽  
Legal Frameworks ◽  
The Eu

The EU Takeover Directive from 2004 has attempted to harmonise Takeover Law within the European Union. The UK’s legal framework governing takeovers served as somewhat of a role model for it. Therefore, Brexit gives rise to the question as to whether the Directive could undergo a reform within the foreseeable future. This paper aims to re-address the harmonisation of European Takeover Law post-Brexit by examining how UK and US Takeover Law could potentially influence its reform. It will be made apparent how the UK’s role in European Takeover Law suggests that Brexit might actually lead to its reform, which is most likely going to drive the respective legal frameworks further apart. Another significant finding concerns the comparability of the US and EU governmental system, which indicates that the foreseeable development of European Takeover Law could be prone to issues which appear in the US. In order to overcome several difficulties that European Takeover Law will face, the paper makes two recommendations. With regard to a regulatory reform at the current state of research, the EU should take a neutral approach by providing companies with an optional framework governing Takeover Law. In order to determine which provisions are desirable for the creation of shareholder value, it is submitted that further research in this field should be encouraged. a

The (Rebuttable) Presumption of the European Union Member States as ‘Safe Countries’ under the Dublin Regulation

2012 ◽  
pp. 240-255
Author(s):  
Cristina Contartese
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Member State ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
European Court ◽  
Dublin Regulation ◽  
Effective Remedy ◽  
European Union Member States ◽  
The Eu

The purpose of this chapter is to analyze a particular aspect of the so-called Dublin Regulation, whose aim is to determine the European Union (EU) Member State responsible for examining an asylum application, that is, the presumption that the EU Member States are “safe countries.” Although the notion of “safe country” is on the base of the Dublin Regulation functioning mechanism, as it implies that any EU Member States can transfer an asylum seeker to any other EU country which is responsible, the authors contend that the safety of an EU Member State can be given as presumed for the purpose of asylum seekers. The analysis of the present work starts, firstly, with the examination of the notion of “safe country” under the Dublin Regulation. In the second part, relying on the European Court of Human Rights’ (ECHR) case-law, it will be discussed to what extent the Court of Strasbourg clarifies the notion of “safe countries” and the test it applies to it. Finally, the Commission’s proposal for a recasting of the Dublin Regulation will be analysed with the aim of foresee possible future developments of the EU law mechanisms to rebut such a presumption as applied to the EU Member States. It will emerge that in order to assess the safety of an EU Member State, attention has to be given to the prohibition of both direct and indirect refoulement as well as to the effective remedy at the EU Member State’s domestic level.

Public participation in decisions on specific activities in environmental matters in Croatia

elni Review ◽  
2012 ◽  
pp. 13-19
Author(s):  
Lana Ofak
Keyword(s):  
Public Participation ◽  
Positive Outcome ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Aarhus Convention ◽  
Specific Activities ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

Croatia finished accession negotiations with the EU in June 2011. The Accession Treaty was signed on 9 December 2011. The EU accession referendum in Croatia was held in January 2012 with a positive outcome. 66.27% of Croatian citizens voted in favour of Croatian accession to the European Union and 33.13% of votes were against the accession. Following ratification of the Accession Treaty by the 27 EU member states, accession of Croatia to the EU is expected to take place on 1 July 2013. In the 2011 Progress Report, European Commission stated that there has been progress in the area of environment. Overall, Croatia’s environmentorientated preparations are nearing completion in terms of both alignment and implementation of the relevant legislation. However, implementation of the horizontal acquis, and in particular effective public participation and access to justice in environmental matters, need to be improved. The purpose of this article is twofold. Firstly, it provides a general overview of the legal framework for public participation in decisions on specific activities in Croatia, which is intended to implement provisions of Art. 6 of the Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (hereinafter: the Aarhus Convention or Convention). Implementation of Art. 7 and 8 of the Aarhus Convention are not discussed. Secondly, specific problems in exercising the right to participate in environmental impact assessment procedures in Croatia are analysed. It is shown that there are cases of non-compliance with the provisions of Art. 6 of the Aarhus Convention.

scholarly journals Year 2019 and international agenda of the European Council

2020 ◽  
pp. 45-51
Author(s):  
Nigar Tahir qizi Sultanova
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Foreign Affairs ◽  
European Council ◽  
Policy Agenda ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Political Cooperation ◽  
The Eu

The European Council represents the supreme level of political cooperation between the EU member-states. Diverse questions pertaining to international politics are discusses on the various levels: summits (in 2019 EU – League of Arab States summit, EU –China summit, EU – Ukraine summit in Kyiv, EU – Canada summit in Montreal, G7 summit); conferences and informal meetings; council boards on foreign affairs; joint conferences; association councils, etc. A new strategic agenda 2019-2024 adopted by the European Council determines he priority areas that guide the work of the European Special Councils and other EU institutions. Transatlantic relations, crises in Syria, Ukraine and other parts of the world, relations with Russia, Iran nuclear deal, and other question remain on the agenda of the European Council. The article explores the legal framework of the actions of European Council in the area of foreign policy. The overview of foreign policy agenda of the European Council allows analyzing the role of the European Union on the international arena.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document